You can scratch Sacramento due to its proximity to San Francisco as well. And Orlando is right in the middle of a state that already has three teams.

The Norfolk/Virginia Beach area would, I guess, be as good a spot as any. The only problem is so much of the population is military that a large portion of the potential fan base isn't from there, is by the nature of military service transient, and would already have loyalty to other teams in the areas they're originally from. I ended up living in the Chicago area after being stationed at Great Lakes over 30 years ago, and I really don't give two shits about any local team except the Cubs, whom I hate.

I wonder if San Diego and St. Louis would support a new franchise after getting burned so badly?

I'm guessing that it's officially part of the San Francisco metro area.

Always thought Virginia Beach would be an interesting choice. Or maybe put it near Williamsburg and try to capture both the Hampton Roads and Richmond metro areas. Would be an issue with the Redskins and to a lesser extent the Panthers though.

San Diego is an amazing city and county. Clean, well kept and a bit less expensive than Orange County and definitely less expensive than Los Angeles or Marin County.

If you're into sun, the beach, beach bars, chillin', California Cuisine, Baja-style food and the best Cali vibe without being surrounded by 19 million other people, San Diego is the place for you.

If it wasn't for my need to be in the Hollywood area, I'd pack up and move down there next week.

Oh yeah, and very little humidity.

Sacramento can barely support the Kings and there's just not enough money for there to support an NFL franchise.

The Spanos family is actually from Stockton, which is only about 40 minutes away from Sac but there's no one wealthy enough to build them a stadium.

Plus, the people up there are hardcore fans of both the Raiders and 49ers, just as they're hardcore fans of the Giants and A's. I don't think the Chargers would draw well there, either.

The Chargers are just ****ed. :D

Pretty spot on. :thumb:

Most of those areas already have allegiances to nearby existing NFL teams (i.e. Bucs fans in Orlando, Cowboys fans in San Antonio, etc.) which would make it difficult for a new franchise to establish a local fanbase.

So the London Chargers or the Mexico City Chargers is what this boils down too.

Vancouver Chargers?

Hawaii Chargers.

Move them to N San Diego / S Orange County and call them the "SO-Cal Charger." Plenty of dads with money down in those burbs that wanna take their kids to a game on Sunday. OC and SD both have equal hate for LA as well, and no one in LA gives a damn about the Chargers. Hell, the Rams are an afterthought here in LA.

Put a second team in Vegas. Its all going to be visitors anyway, right?

:shrug:

Would probably work better than two teams in LA.

NFL helps them build a stadium in St. Louis with the promise of the city dropping the lawsuit against the Rams - St. Louis Chargers....

I was a cHargers season ticket holder first in 1984. And was a cHargers season ticket holder for probably 15 to 25 seasons. I have always been a CHIEFS fan first but living in Southern California and being a fan of the NFL we loved going down to Jack Murphy Stadium on Sundays. I had no idea until yesterday that the stadium I went to for decades was been demolished. I went to over 250+ games there and was a cHargers season ticket holder the year they went to the Super Bowl. I had a lot of great times there. Kind of sad to see it like this - http://youtu.be/qi5kHUe7no4 the rise and fall of the San Diego cHargers stadium ->http://youtu.be/LXeKjrE5BnI

St. Louis has 0 interest in the NFL if there's any tax payer $ involved.

The Cardinals left because Bidwill didn't want to spend money to build a stadium as he felt the Cardinals were second tenant to the baseball Cardinals in Busch(which they were).

Then the city built the Dome as a result using all tax payer money to lure the NFL and gave the Rams one of the dumbest leases ever(they gave them an opportunity to get out of the lease before the bonds were paid off)... AND then would've paid more than 50% of the construction cost for the proposed stadium, which is something that no city had done twice within a 20 or 25 year period for the NFL.

Kroenke's intention was to move the team after he became the controlling owner after Frontiere's kids sold the team. Fan support wasn't the reason why they left.

Also, by your logic, LA shouldn't have a NFL team, much less 2, because they've lost 2 NFL teams as well.